It is a league of copy-cats. The back shoulder throw is employed by most offenses now. The 2 TE attack with a WR who can stretch the field will take some drafting to implement, but should be do-able. I like the idea of a 2 TE attack as it is hard to defend and it has the ability to chew up clock. It also means our adequate but not spectacular running game is all we really need.

The closest thing would be a franchise tag and trade kind of thing. Something we've all called for with Flynn and Jenkins in 2012 and 2011, respectively.

Not Ted's style.

There's a couple of ways people would fit this under the cap and justify spending 10 million dollars on Greg.

One calls for us to cut Tramon. I've gone into that one in the Jennings vs Williams thread, so I won't do it again here.

The other one's to re-allocate Driver's money, like Kevin suggested. Not a big fan of this one, either.

You're going to be operating awfully close to the cap, while we have very capable players at the position and could sign a 3rd, 4th WR a lot cheaper/draft one in april. Doesn't seem like it benefits us a whole lot for the risk we're taking, when we have a couple of must-sign players in line to get a contract extension.

Jennings is expendable at this point, while guys like Raji, Matthews, Williams etc leave you awfully thin at a certain position.

Next to that, Jennings is just not as talented as people tend to give him credit for. He's good, no doubt about it, but he's going towards 30, has some injury problems and has always been one tier below the elite.

He's not coming back.

I don't understand why everyone is still so keen on Raji. He's had two part years (end of 2010 and end of regular season in 2012) where he's been good. The rest of the time, he's disappeared. And if you look closely, it's not the usual "disappears because he's doing a thankless job of nose tackle who occupies two players but has low tackle numbers). It's "disappears because he can regularly be tied up with one blocker". That's what makes Pickett a superior DT to me. Unless he's hurt, or gassed in the 4th quarter because he's had to play too many snaps, he virtually always takes two blockers out of the equation. Raji doesn't.

He's had two 5-6 game streaks of dominance and one cool discount-double-check commercial. If it came down to "Raji or Jennings", I'd take the consistent high level of performance of Jennings every time. And go back to the draft/free agent drawing board in search of another starting NT.

Matthews v. Jennings. Matthews in a no brainer.

Williams v Jennings -- I don't know anymore. Before this year I would have said Williams in a heartbeat, because I thought him our best cover guy. Now, I just don't know.

And lets not forget, of the teams who would be substantially improved by signing Jennings, three of them reside in the NFC North. Cutler with Marshall AND Jennings, Stafford with Johnson AND Jennings, those would be particularly scary IMO.

And do not be conformed to this world, but be transformed by the renewing of your mind, that you may prove what is that good and acceptable and perfect will of God. Romans 12:2 (NKJV)

And lets not forget, of the teams who would be substantially improved by signing Jennings, three of them reside in the NFC North. Cutler with Marshall AND Jennings, Stafford with Johnson AND Jennings, those would be particularly scary IMO.

If the packers can't afford to keep Jennings, there is no way in hell the Lions would be able to sign him. They'd have like 50% of their cap in those 3 players. Bears are similar position as Packers. Could make it work for 2013 but both of their corners scheduled to hit free agency in 2014.

Jordy Nelson, Greg Jennings, James Jones and Randall Cobb are very talented. Of the group, only Jennings would be more successful in another offense.

Nelson, Jones and Cobb are products of the offense.

Jennings #1.Nelson #2.Jones #3.Cobb #3.

Packers have two 3's, one 2 and one 1.

All your theory is about is conjecture. The reason Jennings won't be franchised is because he isn't worth that much money just like Ted didn't think Wells was worthy of the franchise tag last year. If Jennings is franchised, I would be surprised if he wasn't traded for picks prior to the draft.

All your theory is about is conjecture. The reason Jennings won't be franchised is because he isn't worth that much money just like Ted didn't think Wells was worthy of the franchise tag last year. If Jennings is franchised, I would be surprised if he wasn't traded for picks prior to the draft.

You have no theory and you are solely basing your response on conjecture where mine had facts in it. You can look them up yourself. Also, Scott Wells didn't want to return to the Packers and admitted as much. and Wells wasn't franchise tag worthy. That brings up a question, is Greg Jennings worth the $10 million for 2013 season?

Greg Jennings is clearly the best WR the Packers have. I'd rather Jennings on the roster and let Jermichael Finley go and see Andrew Quarless earn the starting TE position.

There are some consequences to tagging someone an hoping for a trade. It happened once, with Corey Williams. The CBA and some rules have changed since then, which makes me doubt we'll see that move again for the Ted Thompson Packers. The moment that player signs the tender, it becomes guaranteed cash and that is exactly why the Packers didn't franchise tag Matt Flynn. He would have been entitled to something like $15 million to sit on the bench.

You have no theory and you are solely basing your response on conjecture where mine had facts in it. You can look them up yourself. Also, Scott Wells didn't want to return to the Packers and admitted as much. and Wells wasn't franchise tag worthy. That brings up a question, is Greg Jennings worth the $10 million for 2013 season?

Greg Jennings is clearly the best WR the Packers have. I'd rather Jennings on the roster and let Jermichael Finley go and see Andrew Quarless earn the starting TE position.

There are some consequences to tagging someone an hoping for a trade. It happened once, with Corey Williams. The CBA and some rules have changed since then, which makes me doubt we'll see that move again for the Ted Thompson Packers. The moment that player signs the tender, it becomes guaranteed cash and that is exactly why the Packers didn't franchise tag Matt Flynn. He would have been entitled to something like $15 million to sit on the bench.

A three year deal is all I'd offer Jennings and not at $10M per either. Just because he happens to be our top receiver at the moment doesn't justify overpaying him. The Wells and Jennings situation is a lot different because one of the strengths of the Packers is the depth of the WR position - but the depth of the OLine causes a lot of concern. The Packers should have franchised Wells. Who gives a shit about hurt feelings.

I would be for franchising Jennings for a year - but then he is gone anyway after that.

I think play to win is right. I think Jenningshas an inflated opinions of himself and will wantthe moon. seems like his talk has beentowards his wanting out of Green Bay.I think he's good, but his attitude this season has been strange. I don't see Ted overpaying for him.besides the fact that gb needs a full defensive overhaul. I don't know if theycan get enough defense pieces to fixthe problems they have to be competitivewith the higher tier teams.

Jennings definitely falls under the category of Packers people, and I think he definitely would consider a discount. As the #1 WR here, he knows that there are two other #1 receivers on this team, and he knows that Jermichael Finley could have another year to prove himself.

He already stated quite plainly that he "hopes" he's not franchised. IMO, especially considering the fact that he's a 2nd round draft choice who has outplayed every contract he's signed, he deserves to hit the open market. Maybe he'll turn out to be like James Jones. Not in the sense that nobody will show interest, but in the sense that he'll figure that GB is the proper home for him.

I think we all know Jennings needs Green Bay more than Green Bay needs him, but I also think the goal of any NFL player on the business sides of things who turns out to be good deserves their shot at a big payday.

Jennings definitely falls under the category of Packers people, and I think he definitely would consider a discount. As the #1 WR here, he knows that there are two other #1 receivers on this team, and he knows that Jermichael Finley could have another year to prove himself.

He already stated quite plainly that he "hopes" he's not franchised. IMO, especially considering the fact that he's a 2nd round draft choice who has outplayed every contract he's signed, he deserves to hit the open market. Maybe he'll turn out to be like James Jones. Not in the sense that nobody will show interest, but in the sense that he'll figure that GB is the proper home for him.

I think we all know Jennings needs Green Bay more than Green Bay needs him, but I also think the goal of any NFL player on the business sides of things who turns out to be good deserves their shot at a big payday.

Not a good thing then. His Agent is the same as Fitzgerald. Who has also has Suh, who held out his rookie contact, and Michael Crabtree who also held out into the regular season.

You cannot post new topics in this forum.
You cannot reply to topics in this forum.
You cannot delete your posts in this forum.
You cannot edit your posts in this forum.
You cannot create polls in this forum.
You cannot vote in polls in this forum.